Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Database Health Index
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Database Health Index

83

Published on

RIMS Forum - 20 March 2013 …

RIMS Forum - 20 March 2013
Mike Tapper - Beca

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
83
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Measuring and Monitoring Confidencein your RAMM DatabaseViren Sharma 20 March 2013Mike Tapper2013 Road Asset and Information Forum, Wellington
  • 2. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 3
  • 3. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 7 Objective Purpose is to identify a repeatable mechanism for reporting the health of the data in the RAMM Database. The index will be used to establish current condition and a benchmark for monitoring improvement
  • 4. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 10Index Framework RAMM INDEX RAMM INDEX Pavement and Non- Active Assets Footpath Collected Data Collected Data Carriageway Assets Assets •• Visual Rating Visual Rating •• Surfacings Surfacings •• High Speed Automated •• Bridges Bridges •• Data Data Pavements Pavements •• Drainage Drainage •• Footpath Footpath •• Footpaths Footpaths •• SWC SWC Rating Rating •• Treatment Treatment •• Signs Signs •• Maintenance Maintenance Length Length Costs Costs •• Streetlights Streetlights •• Traffic Traffic
  • 5. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 11 Confidence Grading Grade Description 1 Accurate / measured data 2 Minor inaccuracies 3 50% estimated 4 Significant data estimated 5 All data estimated Grading Regime This format is used for both the ranking and the target setting.
  • 6. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 12 Dashboard Results – Pavement and FootpathsCategory Measures Result Measure Target Category Target Group TargetPavement and Footpath Inventory % of Network surfaced in RAMM over previous 4 – 15 months 7.6% Grade 2 Grade 1Surfacing % Surfaces 50% older than expected age 0.0% Grade 1 Grade 2 92 82 Illogical records (SAC with chipseal, unsealed with surface dates, duplicates, low & 0.2% Grade 1 Grade 1 high widths, traffic volumes v hierarchy/pavement use, overlaps, no surfacings etc) % of Network in RAMM 4 – 27 months previous 3.4% Grade 2 Grade 2Footpaths Benchmark length v typical urban length/km 93.3% Grade 1 Grade 2 84 82 Illogical records incl. % with no material or surface date, overlaps, duplicates etc 1.7% Grade 1 Grade 1 79 78 Proportion with layer information on roads with ADT > 500 vpd 99.7% Grade 1 Grade 3Pavement 50 65Layer st New Layer length v 1 coat length in 4 – 15 months 0.0% Grade 4 Grade 2 Proportion of very short (< 20m) or very long (> 500m urban and 1km rural) TLs 10.8% Grade 2 Grade 1Treatment Proportion of TLs with < 80% coverage of major surfacing 3.1% Grade 1 Grade 1 91 83Length % updated in last 5 years on roads with ADT >500vpd 100.0% Grade 1 Grade 2
  • 7. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 13 Dashboard Results – Collected DataCategory Measures Result Measure Target Category Target Group TargetCollected Data Percentage compliant with AT policy (i.e. Percentage > 500 vpd not rated in last 100.0% Grade 1 Grade 1Carriageway 1.5 years plus percentage < 500 vpd not rated in last 2.5 years) 100 90Rating % compliant with AT policy (i.e inspection length < 95% or rating section length > 99.5% Grade 1 Grade 1 300m unless rural local roads, service lanes etc where inspection length < 20%) % network meeting AT policy for roughness (Main roads surveyed in last 1.5 98.8% Grade 1 Grade 1 years and local roads in last 2.5 years)High Speed % network meeting AT policy for rutting (Main roads surveyed in last 1.5 years and 96.4% Grade 1 Grade 1 97 90Data local roads in last 2.5 years) % network meeting AT policy for texture (Main roads surveyed in last 1.5 years 96.4% Grade 1 Grade 1 and local roads in last 2.5 years) Items per km for PA and SU fault codes in previous 4 – 15 months 16.4% Grade 5 Grade 2Maintenance 58 80 76 87Costs Spread of location in previous 4 - 15 months 0.0% Grade 1 Grade 2 Counts in last 4 - 15 months (vs AT programme) 0% Grade 5 Grade 1 % having ADT Estimates 96.5% Grade 1 Grade 1Traffic Count 30 85 % estimates < 3 years old 4.2% Grade 5 Grade 1 % loading estimate + count (i.e. not default) 18.0% Grade 5 Grade 2Footpath Percentage compliant with AT policy (i.e. Percentage rated in last 3.5 years) 95.3% Grade 1 Grade 1 95 90Rating
  • 8. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 14Category Measures Result Measure Target Category Target Group TargetNon-Carriageway Asset Inventory Difference in No. of bridges in database v Valuation quantity 10.0% Grade 1 Grade 1Dashboard Results – Non-Carriageway AssetsBridges Bridges with as-built drawings attached 40.9% Grade 3 Grade 2 76 83 Bridges with Inspection reports within the last 2.5 yerars 97.7% Grade 1 Grade 1 Culverts per km v benchmark (Rural) 102.6% Grade 1 Grade 2Drainage 93 80 Catchpits per km v benchmark (Urban) 86.2% Grade 2 Grade 2Surface SWC per urban km v benchmark 92.3% Grade 1 Grade 2Water 67 76 65 80Channels Renewal Activity (Construction Date in previous 4 – 27 months) 2.3% Grade 3 Grade 2 Signs per km v benchmark (Urban) 51.1% Grade 3 Grade 2Signs 27 78 Renewal Activity (“replaced” date in previous 4 – 15 months) 0.2% Grade 4 Grade 2 Streetlights per km v benchmark (Urban) 64.8% Grade 3 Grade 2Streetlights Maintenance Activity (“replaced” date in previous 4 – 15 months) 1.2% Grade 4 Grade 2 61 82 Duplicates or near duplicates plus poles with no light or bracket 0.1% Grade 1 Grade 1
  • 9. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page 15 Implementation  The index is run annually with a full report  Index run quarterly with dashboard only  Modular results give focus on key areas  Allows a targeted improvement plan  Tracks effectiveness on funding spent
  • 10. AT | Measuring and Monitoring Confidence in your RAMM Data base Page Questions/Discussion

×